hello, I am absolutely new, means from non-IT sector but have attraction (developed recently) towards linux and have chosen the centos distro for the installation as an OS in my home PC for personal use. I went to the page: http://isoredirect.centos.org/centos/5/isos/i386/ But don't understand amongst the variety of options there. I also don't know the technical terms like md5, etc...., can one directly give me the link for down loadable Cent OS 5.5 (which is latest) and better if it is the torrent download. I guess there would be only one file of .iso format which is to be burned and installed. If I am wrong, please let me know. -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110116/6ec9887f/attachment-0002.html>
> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces at centos.org > [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Parshwa Murdia > Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 9:52 > To: centos at centos.org > Subject: [CentOS] Troubles for an non-IT beginner > > hello, > > I am absolutely new, means from non-IT sector but have > attraction (developed > recently) towards linux and have chosen the centos distro > for the installation as an OS in my home PC for personal use. > I went to the page: > > http://isoredirect.centos.org/centos/5/isos/i386/ > > But don't understand amongst the variety of options there. I > also don't know the technical terms like md5, etc...., cani386 is for older technology PCs. The x86_64 is for newer PCs You can ignore the other folders and files.> one directly give me the link for down loadable Cent OS 5.5 > (which is latest) and better if it is the torrent download. I > guess there would be only one file of .iso format which is toThe DVD version would be only one ISO, the CD version will use multiple 1 of X.> be burned and installed. If I am wrong, please let me know. > > -- > > Regards, > Parshwa Murdia >-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 15:51 +0100, Parshwa Murdia wrote:> hello, > I am absolutely new, means from non-IT sector but have attraction > (developed recently) towards linux and have chosen the centos distro > for the installation as an OS in my home PC for personal use. I went > to the page: > http://isoredirect.centos.org/centos/5/isos/i386/ > But don't understand amongst the variety of options there. I also > don't know the technical terms like md5, etc....,You can ignore md5 for now - they are just for verifying that the file you've downloaded has not been modified.> can one directly give me the link for down loadable Cent OS 5.5 (which > is latest) and better if it is the torrent download. I guess there > would be only one file of .iso format which is to be burned and > installed.A DVD will be one image (file) and easier than x-of-n CDs.
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Digimer <linux at alteeve.com> wrote: The kernel is, if I recall correctly, 2.6.18 that has only been patched> to fix bugs and security features. The modern kernel is 2.6.37, and a > *lot* of hardware has come along in the years in between. For example, > it's unlikely that things like bluetooth, most wireless interfaces, > modern video cards, etc, will work. > > Another option, if you are concerned about the short life cycle of > Fedora, would be to look at Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The 'LTS' means "Long Term > Support" and will be supported for a fairly long time. 10.04 was > released last April, so it will be quite up to date.Okay, as seem Ubuntu is supposed to have a longer life. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Cameron Kerr <cameron at humbledown.org>wrote: Doesn't have stability!? News to me (at least for Ubuntu). Seriously though,> you would probably find that a Fedora or Ubuntu would support your desktop > hardware (particularly things like Wireless and Graphics card) much better > than a distribution aimed at servers. It's also a lot more newbie friendly. >Okay, but my meaning to say was that it has an end of life every six months. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: Note that ubuntu has an 'LTS" (long term support) version that splits the> difference between the really fast moving releases and ones that go > unchanged > for a decade. I was pleasantly surprised a short time ago when I fired up > my > dual-boot laptop into an old install of ubuntu 8.04LTS and it asked if I > wanted > to upgrade to the newer 10.4LTS release, then proceeded to do it, > automatically > and successfully. > > There are, however, big differences in administration commands between > Ubuntu > and Centos - but if you are just starting out that probably doesn't matter. >Yes, and one main difference could be that Cent OS might serve purpose better for servers. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller at deepsoft.com> wrote: RedHat does back port drivers, at least 'essential' ones. But yes, much> 'bleeding edge' hardware might not be supported.My PC is for home purpose only and I have only a small hardward - just speakers, a printer (Samsung printer), one net connection, one flatron screen with an assemble CPU having Inter Core 2 duo processor, 2 GB ram and 250 GB hard-disk. Speakers are frequently used and nothing else. In this scenario, I hope that all the drivers red hat might be supporting as it is the minimal of a computer sys., now in this bleeding edge technology era! On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller at deepsoft.com> wrote: In theory yes. The thing is the 'minimal install' would be very> minimal indeed. Probably no GUI or any of the other 'goodies' you > might expect to have. This would be fine for a fairly experienced IT > person, but might be somewhat 'hard' for a novice user. > > If can only manage to download *one* *CD* (either can't deal with a DVD > or don't want to download 7 CDs), then you should download the > netinstall CD. This is actually a very *small* iso image. Assuming you > have a decent Internet connection, the netinstall CD can install > packages directly from the Internet. >Ok I try one way. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller at deepsoft.com> wrote: It is good for:> > 1) Taking a 'test drive' to see if linux is something you want to > pursue. Or to demostrate Linux to people who might not have seen or > used Linux -- it is easier to lug a CD than a whole computer. > > 2) To use as a multifunction rescue system. > > 3) To use Linux on a machine that Linux cannot be installed on (eg not > your machine). > > 4) To see if Linux will work on the machine in question before > committing to installing on it. Can be used to test Linux compatibity > with store display models, for example.On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Michael Klinosky <mpk2 at enter.net> wrote: It's meant to be used to test if the distro likes your system, or test> if you like the distro. > > Do you know what a 'Live CD' is? Boot your computer from it; it'll run > the OS - but only in RAM or from the CD. It won't change anything on > your hard drive.Oh I see, this is really good option Linux has provided! On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: CentOS will work for desktop use but it is not ideal, especially as it gets> older. With only a few exceptions, the support updates have only bug and > security fixes to the package versions shipped in the original release of > the > major distribution version number without adding new features. This is a > good > thing if you run servers with a lot of your own programming that depends on > the > exact behavior of the libraries from that version, but it is a lot less > important for an individual user that wants the newest features from all of > the > available packages. > > If you still want CentOS and aren't in a big hurry, you might wait for the > CentOS6 release which should be coming soon. CentOS 5.x has packages from > around the Fedora 6 era. CentOS 6 should jump that up to be similar to > Fedora 14.Nice, Cent OS 6 would be releasing by the Jan end or Feb, I think....? Another important thing I have is that like you are suggesting for Fedora or Ubuntu but that the newest cutting edge technology could be installed in the older hardware assuming that the hardware has minimal composition, like, only 2 gb ram, hard disk and speaker, with keyboard and a non-usb mouse. In this hardware too we can install any cutting edge OS like fedora or it really depends on the hardware that if it would accept a particular distro or not! -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110116/4def97a3/attachment-0002.html>
On 1/16/2011 3:45 PM, Parshwa Murdia wrote:> > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com > <mailto:lesmikesell at gmail.com>> wrote: > > If you still want CentOS and aren't in a big hurry, you might wait > for the > CentOS6 release which should be coming soon. CentOS 5.x has > packages from > around the Fedora 6 era. CentOS 6 should jump that up to be > similar to Fedora 14. > > > > Nice, Cent OS 6 would be releasing by the Jan end or Feb, I think....? > Another important thing I have is that like you are suggesting for > Fedora or Ubuntu but that the newest cutting edge technology could be > installed in the older hardware assuming that the hardware has minimal > composition, like, only 2 gb ram, hard disk and speaker, with keyboard > and a non-usb mouse. In this hardware too we can install any cutting > edge OS like fedora or it really depends on the hardware that if it > would accept a particular distro or not!Not by the end of January. Probably not by the end of February. CentOS is a volunteer project, so CentOS 6 will be ready when it's ready. If you want to wait for CentOS 6, then keep an eye on either this list or the centos.org website. It will be announced as soon as it is available. -- Bowie
Parshwa, On 16 January 2011 20:45, Parshwa Murdia <b330bkn at gmail.com> wrote:>> Another option, if you are concerned about the short life cycle of >> Fedora, would be to look at Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The 'LTS' means "Long Term >> Support" and will be supported for a fairly long time. 10.04 was >> released last April, so it will be quite up to date. > Okay, as seem Ubuntu is supposed to have a longer life.Ubuntu LTS has a 3 year life cycle overall for desktops, 5 year for servers.> Okay, but my meaning to say was that it has an end of life every six months.Ubuntu and Fedora have a new release approx every 6 months but their end of life is 18 months. (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle#End_of_Life_.28EOL.29) I personally would recommend Ubuntu LTS for family members. CentOS is geared for technical people. -- Hakan (m1fcj) - http://www.hititgunesi.org
Dear Parshwa, I tend to agree with you in some of your points. I migrated my systems from ubuntu to centos and I could not be more happy. off course I have been force to learn the new places where things are "the redhat way" but not problem since the usual tools continue to exist in both platforms. I have decided to run Centos in all my machines thus far, I do have some applications that only run in Windows, in those cases I keep a Virtualbox instance to use those particular applications when needed otherwise I try keeping everything in Centos as native. Do not get me wrong, centos is an "IT" operating system but it could equally be a tool of choice for "non-IT" individuals as long as they are willing to search, read, and ask questions when all else fails. Best of luck and Centos rocks!>>> Parshwa Murdia 01/19/11 10:32 AM >>>On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Christopher R Webber wrote:> I find that in places where I don?t have latest and greatest hardware, > CEntOS makes a much better Desktop OS than Ubuntu. If all I am doingis> running a web browser for the most part, I use CEntOS.Means in your opinion, for a stable OS, cent OS is better. I no doubt agree with the fact its really a personal choice and like me (from not IT or computers), I at first would see the ease of use (yes, probably because I have come from Windows, totally GUI). I like (as what I have found reading and comments I got) Cent OS is secured, stable and an excellent OS, but if you talk of easiness, I guess Ubuntu is above in ranking, where I only talk of ease of use and again its totally the wish of the individual one who is going with what distro. But as for a person, who is really not from IT or uses computers more frequently but want to use one Linux distro, I can say that anyone be it, Cent OS or Ubuntu or even Fedora, at least it is Linux!! -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia Making the simple complicated is commonplace, making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's innovation.. -C Mingus _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110119/3028ed1a/attachment-0002.html>
As Rober puts it, sometimes is better to keep "Things...stable and reliable" rather than in the "bleeding edge..." makes perfect sense.>>> Robert Heller 01/19/11 10:43 AM >>>At Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:13:41 +0000 (GMT) CentOS mailing list wrote:> > On Wed, 19 Jan 2011, Les Mikesell wrote: > > > CentOS would likely only be used as a desktop OS by people who also run > > servers and like everything to be the same. They all assemble approximately > > the same set of upstream packages, though, so it is possible to make them > > all do the same things with varying amounts of work in finding current > > packages that might be missing in the base distribution. > > I do think CentOS gets unreasonably knocked as a desktop OS. I definitely > don't use it on desktops *because* I run it on servers. > > All the advantages of long release cycles apply to desktops. Despite often > thinking otherwise, many users require relatively few packages to be the > latest shiniest, so running a bleeding edge distro isn't really needed. Even > then, a reasonably amount of software can end up being commercial, where EL5 > is currently better supported than any other linux release. Where users do > have requirements that diverge from the base OS, it's probably a good idea for > that to be satisfied out of the main OS tree anyway, as that lets you satisfy > local requirements while keeping the core identical across the board.+1 The local library was originally setup with Ubuntu, but the tech geek who set it up was NOT very good at maintaining things (applying updates, doing basic admin stuff). When I took over administrating things and set up the new incarnation of 'thin clients', I installed CentOS and with proper maintaince things run much more smoothly. The 'desktop' systems are used by patrons and library staff people alike (not techy geeks!). Things are stable and reliable. The fact that stuff is not bleeding edge is not something that really has much effect for most people. *I* use CentOS on *my* desktop AND on *my* laptop.> > jh > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >-- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / heller at deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110119/94e06459/attachment-0002.html>
On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 12:55:19 pm Les Mikesell wrote:> And remember that firefox/openoffice are rare exceptions in RHEL/Centos > in that they have had major-version updates since the distro release, > even though they still are far behind 'current' now.How is Firefox 3.6.13 not current (that's what's on my CentOS 5 boxen, straight from the updates)? OOo isn't too terribly old, at 3.1.1 instead of the 3.3 on my F14 box. Yes, these are pretty rare exceptions, but even the other packages will get backports of security fixes where that is possible. FF and OOo are two of the most visible cases where it just wasn't possible.
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Lisandro Grullon <lgrullon at citytech.cuny.edu> wrote:> Dear Parshwa, > I tend to agree with you in some of your points. I migrated my systems from > ubuntu to centos and I could not be more happy. off course I have been force > to learn the new places where things are "the redhat way" but not problem > since the usual tools continue to exist in both platforms.? I have decided > to run Centos in all my machines thus far, I do have some applications that > only run in Windows, in those cases I keep a Virtualbox instance to use > those particular applications when needed otherwise I try keeping everything > in Centos as native. Do not get me wrong, centos is an "IT" operating system > but it could equally be a tool of choice for "non-IT" individuals as long as > they are willing to search, read, and ask questions when all else fails. > Best of luck and Centos rocks!Ultimately it means, Cent OS is good to start with! -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia Making the simple complicated is commonplace, making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's innovation.. -C Mingus